Rickresource Rickenbacker Forum

Hi, I'm new here so I'd like some info about something I've seen mentioned in the for sale forum. I think it was Jeff who said he liked his 4 to 5 conversions better than his 4003s5's. Just what is involved in this? I have a fairly scuffed 1977 4001 in faded white, as well as a FG 4000 with normal wear. I might like to change my 4001 to a 5 string since it has a fair number of finish imperfections and I have replaced the neck pup with a Seymour Duncan SRB1-N. I had also replaced ALL of the wiring since it was pretty much trashed by the previous owner, so there is no vintage sacrilege involved. Anyone with info please reply, & many thanks in advance.

don't convert a 4001 ... I don't think the neck is strong enough ... the old 4001 basses are made for low tensioned flat wound strings ... and only 4 of them ... the 4003 can take 4 or 5 strings of any kind ... the 4003s5 is an awesome bass ... but I also like my 4003 4-2-5 conversion basses ... the converted bass will have a little wider string spacing at the bridge 2 1/4" and about 1/8" narrower at the nut ... also the resonance of the bass improves with the tension of the 5th string added ... so if you want a conversion bass get an '86 or later 4003 ... I especially like the '98 and later 4003 basses ... the 4004L and 4004C basses make good five string models ... I can get the bridge string spacing to 2 3/8" on a 4004 ...

http://www.3dentourage.com/425/

Thanks for the info. I'm using roundwound strings on both my 1977 4001 & 1976 4000, but haven't seen any ill effects due to higher string tension. Has anyone ever had any problems?

yep the necks of a few 4001 basses have failed ... I used high tension rounds on a '68 4001 for 30 years and it was fine ...

OK! So I'm off the real topic here (but this DOES relate to five strings).

I heard that Keef's first five string guitar (when he got into open "G" tunings) was a Ric six string that was modified. Don't know what model or even if this is true.

Xtone - aka: The Thread Killer

This is somewhat related. Were the 4003s5's available with body binding and/or longer scale length? If not I'll probably get a 4003 and convert. The narrower spacing shouldn't bother me much. Also I noticed the tuners are smaller than the old ones on my mid '70's basses. On the conversions, is there adequate space to just drill an extra hole in between the 2 existing tuners? That's what I gathered was done from what I could see in the pictures. I think a conversion would be simpler because there doesn't seem to be very many 4003s5's around for sale. There are plenty of 4003's, & besides they are still being made. I take it the 5's are no longer in production.

the 4003s5 is based on a 4003s ... no binding and no triangle inlays ... the 4003s and 4003 are both 33 1/4" scale basses ...

there is just barely enough room to add a third tuner ...

Ric is not currently making a 5 string bass ... the 4003s5 is discontinued ... the 4004CII5 is being redesigned ... there are a few 4003s5 out there a few pop up on ebay ... for gigging I usually use my 4004 4-2-5 or 4003 4-2-5 basses ... I have 7 5 string rics ... 6 of them are 4-2-5 conversions ...


here is a 2001 4003 fireglo with schaller m4 tuners and with the newer larger headstock





here is a '96 jetglo 4003 with Gotoh tuners and the older shorter headstock ... putting a 5th tuner in here is a squeeze ...



here is an '89 4003s5 headstock ...



here is a '90 4003s5 headstock with stained headwings ...


and a 4004CI 4-2-5 headstock with an additional gold schaller m4 tuner added ...

New 4003 conversion it is then. Maybe JetGlo. I've always loved those. Aesthetically I prefer 4001/4003 styling to the 4004's for some reason.I've never been a fan of light wood for fingerboards, & the binding on the body always looks refined & crisp, particularly on stage. And as several folks have noted in other threads new Ricks aren't much of a gamble quality-wise. Any I've seen were set up quite well. There always seems to be frequent complaints about Fender & Gibson quality being somewhat lower than was found right out of the box in past years.

I like your taste dude ...

Very nice JG. From the first time I saw Geddy's it was my favorite. And who could argue that anything else sounds better? Not me for sure. Someone had posted that 4003's have more low end than 4001's. Is that just from being capacitor-free or is it something different in the design changes that have occurred over the years?

a 4003 is fuller sounding for 2 reasons ... the pickups are wound to 11 k ohms as opposed to 8k ohms for a 4001 and there is no bass cut capacitor ...

Aaaahhhhh so! Now I see. Sorry I haven't said it earlier, but many thanks Jeff for your helpful info. I've learned more about Ricks in the last 2 weeks reading posts (many yours) than the 26 years I've been in love with these things!(though I've only owned one for 20). Your basses are beautiful, by the way. I went through a black on black phase early on, but I really like most the bold contrast of dark color & white binding, or vice versa.
Now If I could only find someone willing to sell these beauties here in Canada. The only new 4003's I have seen were in Moncton, & they were both FG. They weren't available at the same time though, but several years apart. Since they do take a while to fill orders, maybe I'll see if Musicstop will order one & I'll put it on layaway, thus softening the financial blow. If they're an authorized dealer that is.

ya I had a Ric for 25 years and I didn't know how to date it or that there was a .0047 capaciter in there ... I learned a lot of what I know here too ...

Jeff: When I get my 4001C64S (sometime in '06), I might be interested having you do a 4-2-5 conversion of my '01 4003DG.
1)Is this bass a good candidate for the conversion?
2)What is your production time frame?
3)What am I looking at in $$$?
Thanks!

1) It is a good candidate, but since it is a "color of the year", I wouldn't recommend it. I'd keep that baby stock!